On May 13, 1:24 pm, Sylvain Le Gall <[email protected]> wrote: > As you stated, converting non-tail recursive to tail recursive made the > code a little more complex. Another argument is the expected number of > recursive calls. If you know that you will have a limited number of > call (e.g. 1024) and that non-tail recursive form is more clear, you > should pick the non-tailrec.
I wrote my message too fast. The point of the message was the performance of a compiled recursive function. I meant functions which you don't know anything in particular about: so, for example, you can't assume a maximum number of iteration. What I really want to know is: *is Ocaml compiler smart enough to optimize a non-tail recursive function so that it run as fast as the tail-recursive version of the same ?* If the answer is yes, then rewriting functions as tail-recursive is wasted time! (And in this case i will avoid to do it!). If the answer is no, then i can still decide, case by case, if i prefer an easier code or a faster one. Hope I was clearer this time. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ocaml-developer" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ocaml-developer?hl=en For other OCaml forums, see http://caml.inria.fr/resources/forums.en.html
